Damag I enjoy my division rivalries, in the Smythe, in fact I think it has made us all respect each other more, In 24 of the 39 seasons a Smythe team has represented our conference in the Finals, that is a pretty impressive stat, and the fact that it has not been one dominant team in our division is even more fun.
I was just throwing out an idea that literally popped into my head as I was typing.

It just seems that the CCC plays a more offensive regular season and the POW plays a tighter style...although I acknowledge this is a broad brush stroke statement, thinking maybe mixing teams might bring some kind of Fresh Element

I am not sure that having an extra FP that does not play would really require more policing.

While I really enjoy the league I do agree with OKP that the new rules have really taken out the upsets in the playoffs, I would like to see some kind of difference in the draft, it does not have to be juiced ...maybe more younger players? It is no secret they improve at a better rate,
The other thing that seems to make the biggest difference is the D men more than Forwards not sure what could be done about that.

Maybe I need to think a little harder I agree we don't want every player being 100 rated, just not sure how to freshen things up a little

1) we should scrap the crosby bonus for sure. the way i've won my cups and PTs are by losing for three seasons, picking up three very high draft picks with the bonuses, and the third being a crosby bonus. by the fourth season, i have three top flight rookies to go with the veterans leftover from my last run and some middle guys in the meantime. there's already bonuses for the bottom six, i think the crosby bonus is unecessary and too much incentive to tank in that third season.

2) if we aren't going to get rid of the B6 bonuses, i think we should cut them in half. it would still give a little boost to the teams that finish at the bottom, and added to their chance at getting one of the top draft picks, it would still help them turn the team around. but it would also make it harder for those players to hit a hundred across the board. i'd rather see a lot less maxed out players than we have now. i think this would help with the issue of no upsets as well. the longer it takes players to max out, the more likely the top teams are of icing medium stars. thus more chances of a lower seed upsetting. i wouldn't mind even seeing the draft dialed down a little. the only problem being that lower ratings means lower stamina, which means more injuries. but personally i'd rather only see the FP players hitting the maxed out stats, rather than six to eight on one team going for a cup run with the rest of the team at 80+ stats. :>

i don't mind the idea of a second franchise player. or maybe not a second franchise player, but the ability to play one player for a seventh year, in addition to the FP. so you could have two $796K players on your roster, but never two that are both more than $796K. if that makes sense. lol. :>

I'm a bit exhausted as I type this so I don't have much to add right now.....but I thought I'd chime in briefly to let you know realignment isn't possible or doable, from the WifS side of things.... I've already looked into it way back in the early days of the MLD. I inquired about it back when I wanted to know if it was possible to switch teams in and out of divisions in an attempt to set up a ladder type style league, with seasonal promotions and demotions, within a 6 tiered division setup. Sadly, for whatever reason, I was informed this was not possible........(would have been cool feature for the MLD too)

However, with that said, if any 2 GMs agreed to it and wanted a change of scenery and wanted to completely swap franchises(GM seats) ....that'd probably be possible.......kinda strange but possible.....it'd be very weird to see something like that and with the time we all invest into our MLD teams, I doubt anyone would want to do that. lol

Regarding corbs' suggestion about juicing the draft... D-men having more influence than forwards... distribution of players... remember that those elements are inherent to the game engine itself. ML players, in the larger sim world, are in the engine only to supplant real life players. We are using them for purposes they were never really intended for.

Asking WiS to change the nature of these players we are given would in fact be one step closer to actually building Hockey Dynasty for real.

And about the 20 Game Rule... note that it's a rule we enacted that accomplished exactly what it was intended to do. And no one's had to police it, no one's cheated it. In practice, many/most of us don't want to burn a year of a player's eligibility when unnecessary, so what the 20 game rule does is that it makes us show our hands from the beginning, or for the majority of the regular season. So I would say that it's not that it ensures certainty of playoff success, what it does ensure is that the regular season standings are truly representative of team strength.

Sadly, for whatever reason, I was informed this was not possible........(would have been cool feature for the MLD too)

OKP no big deal was just a thought, about how to get some change, but I quite enjoy the love/hate we have in the Smythe...if anything I think it has made me pay a lot more attention to games within the division. My whole lineup this season with the exception of 2 or 3 players are either true rookies or second year players so I won't be much of a challenge this season, but I will try

What about creating a new special player title???......a "Playoff Hero!" (PH) Each team would get 1 just as they do with the FPs.

A Playoff Hero(PH) could/would be a single (1) player, who played/plays less than 20 regular season games, but would still be eligible for participating in playoffs. This particular player would have to be declared in the previous offseason . This player would have to be a different player than the team's FP player.

It looks like part of the trouble is too many players maxing out their stats and teams stockpiling their superstars. Here is my favorite idea to try and address both of those.

Salary-up all stars. This is a simple idea that will reduce tanking and cycle players through the league faster. The idea is all players with a max score in any category at the start of the season will salary-up the next season, whether that player is used or not. It would be fairly easy to police – at the start of the season just make a list of all players who have a max rating in any one category, then at the end of the season make sure that all of those players made 20 games. If not they get their salary manually adjusted up the next season anyways. I think this would end up policing itself as there is really no incentive to burn a season from a star as well as the 18 players who are actually playing. The star players’ salary goes up every season regardless and you can’t keep him indefinitely on your roster. After 5 or 6 seasons we will see most teams down to a handful of players only with max ratings, the rest will have salary-upped to the point of retirement.

I like the idea paul71.... the only downfall I see would be policing and enforcing such a rule.....and then the maintenance involved behind the scenes to manually up those salaries......I know that the player file that I tweak in every off season does NOT have a value for salary, that something that's done elsewhere in the system....

The purpose of the draft pick bonus is to help out struggling teams - and not to help strong teams pad their stats further. Perhaps the draft pick bonus is only awarded to struggling teams.

And how do you tell a strong team trying to pad their stats? I think any team with at least 1 player with +100 rating in any skill that is not playing the season is a team padding their stats, and therefore ineligible for the draft bonus.

Yes and no Paul. I have a player I drafted 9 seasons ago, Werkin Progress. He has a d rating of 100 he got probably in his 2nd season. His stamina was extremely low, around the upper 30's if I recall correctly. His stamina is now at 58 and his is injured for 18 games. To me, that wouldn't be fair to categorize him into me padding his stats, as I am trying to build his stamina into the 70's so he is at least useful for half a season.
The only true way to do this is to increase salaries every year regardless of how many games a player has played in a season. This presents it's own unique issues as well, as is evidenced in Gollum's BALD league.

Its a very tricky thing to tackle and Chuck brings up a solid point that kinda nixes that idea.......

but after reading your ideas Paul, I had another one that touches on whether or not a team is awarded a draft pick bonus (B6 or SC)

In order for any non-playoff bound team to qualify for any given draft bonus in any given season, their roster MUST have had a minimum of at least 18(or 20) skaters(non-goalies) who reached the 20 regular season games mark in that season. If they didn't, no B6 or SC would be awarded to that team

However, I'm not even sure that the draft bonus(es)do that much in terms of assisting teams getting stronger.....I think its something else.

I personally only did this one season awhile back, so I don't know if this is accurate.....BUT I think the real aim/tactic is for any team who isn't confident their team can win the Cup in any given season, and intentionally "tank" is to have the least amount of players who'll hit the 20 game mark.....because it A) saves player seasons toward their career limit and B) get skill upgrades while doing so and C) collect those draft bonuses

Perhaps that is where we can find a solution, by setting up a requirement where every team must meet a minimum # of skaters(non-goalie) who hit the 20 game mark.....with a possible penalty if they don't...the penalty would have to be somewhat heavy to deter folks from just absorbing the penalty.......like say a team wide skill decrease of -5 to each skill category for all players on the team? (would wipe out any improvements and then some..... for what the team would have gotten in that season and possibly make things worse for them skill-wise)

Just thinking out loud here........

BUT on the flip side....perhaps nothing should be done at all as it is simply a unique strategy some folks are using......a strategy where they may end up with a strong team, but there is never really a guarantee they'll win it all when they choose to "go for it".......if they choose to waste away any number of seasons, that should be their decision shouldn't it?....it means easy wins for those who do not use that strategy.......

However, since the creation of the MLD, I have always wanted a setup where every team is trying to win it all every season.......

Really tricky stuff, such a diverse group of smart and competitive GMs with so many different strategies being used.......I wish I knew/remember what strategy I used waaaaaay back in season 13....perhaps there was a secret leaguewide tank pact where everyone tanked to let the old commish finally make it the finals and win a cup! lol :P if so.....bring back that strategy guys!! I'm overdue!! lmao